Yellow | Coo 06/2014

And that is the privilege that YRCW enjoys, they OWN the company. YRCW is under NO obligation to negotiate. As employees, Teamsters have the privilege of accepting or rejecting the offer. Whether it's negotiated or not. Also as Teamsters we have the right to seek another employer when we feel that our efforts are not properly compensated. Which, if I'm not mistaken, you have done. And I admire your courage in doing so.
At this time ALL YRCW company employees are faced with the consequences of the current MOU. In the event you are unaware the labor movement in America is under attack. And with little or no support from politicians there is little hope of any changes to strengthen Labor Law.
Just seems like they are extorting the employees until the equipment can no longer run or no more money to be had
 
The trouble is the Teamsters are no longer equal partners with the companies. And that is a problem that CANNOT be addressed through the collective bargaining process.
 
What does that $6 equate to in today's dollars? And it isnt just about pay, we gave up vacation, retirement, and most of all with the pts, jobs. Im at Holland so the pts doesnt affect me. Yet. But you guys voted your own jobs away and now they are restructuring the network to keep them away. But hey you still have a job right? For now.

$6.00 in 1970 would equal $36.79 today....So the great Jr. Hoffa hasn't even kept you up with the rate of inflation
 
$6.00 in 1970 would equal $36.79 today....So the great Jr. Hoffa hasn't even kept you up with the rate of inflation

Not nit pick, but the $6.00 was 1973 ($5.96 to be precise) and that would be equivalent to $32.90 today. In any event you've made a good point. Truth be told, back then we were paid exceptionally well compared to the averages at that time.
 
$6.00 in 1970 would equal $36.79 today....So the great Jr. Hoffa hasn't even kept you up with the rate of inflation

Well then nor has the great Fred Smith, david abney, congdon family, manny moroun, doug stotlar etc.

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Forum Runner
 
Holland, Reddeway, and New Penn votes counted on YRCF pts , which wasn't right. Guess they should let ABF vote on it too. :17113:

Agree. All the operating companies should have had their own vote on ALL the mou's

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Forum Runner
 
Just wondering is there more road primaries From N to Z? It stops at 123 Maybrook? I work at 152 PHI looking to see if we are affected in anyway?:shrug:
 
As opposed to the many UN-EDUCATED people who voted NO and were ready to shut the job down? Give me a break.

Anything happening now can still be contested and fought if it violates the conditions of the MOU. If the job ended up shutting down because the MOU was rejected and YRCW could not get refinancing then what would you be moaning about? At least all working are still getting paid every week.
I have to disagree with you thinking that yrc was ready to shutdown , yrc will NEVER EVER SHUTDOWN !!!!! its all a numbers game to control the SHEEP !!!! & think about it WHERE did all that BONUS money come from to pay them ??? seems to be FLUSH with cash for that ??
 
Not at all. If (and that's strictly conjecture) another proposal is made for further concessions down the line sometime, every one of us will have the opportunity to examine and evaluate it in light of conditions existing at that time and then coming to an educated decision on how to vote. That's how EDUCATED people do things in my opinion.

PS - Here's a bit of news just out today which everyone should take into account in any decisions they might make about the job:

The U.S. economy turned in its worst quarter since the first three months of 2009, when GDP flagged 5.4% in the wake of the financial meltdown.

Is this comment posted by you, the reason YRC lost $31 million the 1st quarter?
 
Correct but for 2 facts.

1. Again, This Company has to spend more money to fix the mistakes of the past. When will they learn? For that matter when will WE learn?

2 .P.T.S. With this change they route whomever they have under contract (i.e.Non-Union) to these 3 new breaks. How will that effect the Road Drivers who transfer there? Come on! You know how this crap works! Our driver sits while a Gypsie runs our frt from say, Houston to Memphis while the YRC driver who was off rest, With Hours, Sits for something that pays less then the run he should have had?

Am I missing something here?
Just trying to look at things long term.

You sure you not talking about UPSF???
 
IMPO....and thats just it....IN MY PERSONAL OPINION.....I will call BS when I see it, but will disagree, without being disagreable....I have my own opinion on issues and will speak out.....IF that changes your opinion about me, then so be it, I'm not here to be looked up to and could care less.

PTS is, and will contiune to be the thorn in the Road Drivers' asses....the other companies should NEVER had been allowed to vote on giving 6% of OUR work away!

I tried to get members to see down the road, but they were duped by the IBT in the 2nd vote, plain and simple....NOW we will see many more terminals being reclassified as DC to implement even more PTS. They were paid MILLIONS in stock bonuses, while you were given less than $500 of a $750 bonus.

We will NEVER recoupe the wages again and regain what we have lost.

Even if you don't agree with me, I am still here for you in my small pathetic way....BS is BS.....KK
 
all of the yrc family of companies have MORE FREIGHT THAN THEY CAN MOVE or drivers or trucks to move it , so how can the economy be a factor in this ponzi numbers game they are playing ???? a educated driver would know that any good CPA can make the numbers look how every they want, good or bad in our case , point here is that " yrc can never show a profit" or else everybody would want their money back !!!
 
IMPO....and thats just it....IN MY PERSONAL OPINION.....I will call BS when I see it, but will disagree, without being disagreable....I have my own opinion on issues and will speak out.....IF that changes your opinion about me, then so be it, I'm not here to be looked up to and could care less. PTS is, and will contiune to be the thorn in the Road Drivers' asses....the other companies should NEVER had been allowed to vote on giving 6% of OUR work away! I tried to get members to see down the road, but they were duped by the IBT in the 2nd vote, plain and simple....NOW we will see many more terminals being reclassified as DC to implement even more PTS. They were paid MILLIONS in stock bonuses, while you were given less than $500 of a $750 bonus. We will NEVER recoupe the wages again and regain what we have lost. Even if you don't agree with me, I am still here for you in my small pathetic way....BS is BS.....KK

If people think that in the 19,000 votes returned in the 2 ballots for this MOU, the vote swung 12,000 votes, on the basis of language ONLY, I have only this to say.. C'MON MAN!
"The sheep" didn't turn this much. I say look at DC and the IBT'. Just sayin'
 
And that is the privilege that YRCW enjoys, they OWN the company. YRCW is under NO obligation to negotiate. As employees, Teamsters have the privilege of accepting or rejecting the offer. Whether it's negotiated or not. Also as Teamsters we have the right to seek another employer when we feel that our efforts are not properly compensated. Which, if I'm not mistaken, you have done. And I admire your courage in doing so.
At this time ALL YRCW company employees are faced with the consequences of the current MOU. In the event you are unaware the labor movement in America is under attack. And with little or no support from politicians there is little hope of any changes to strengthen Labor Law.

Now that we and the Union are part owners it's supposed to feel better:LMAO:
 
If people think that in the 19,000 votes returned in the 2 ballots for this MOU, the vote swung 12,000 votes, on the basis of language ONLY, I have only this to say.. C'MON MAN!
"The sheep" didn't turn this much. I say look at DC and the IBT'. Just sayin'

Hoosierky, the vote didn't swing by 12,000 votes. In the first vote, 19,651 votes were cast - 7,623 YES votes and 12,028 NO votes. In the second vote 18,539 votes were cast (1,112 fewer than the first vote) - 12,202 YES votes and 6,337 NO votes. In the second vote 4,579 more people voted YES than on the first vote and 5,691 fewer people voted NO than on the first, the difference (1,112) being the fewer number voting on the second MOU. That's nowhere near the 12,000 you are claiming in your post. As a matter of fact, if all the original YES voters voted YES again in the second vote, it would have only taken 1,647 original NO voters to have changed their vote to pass the MOU. Do the math.
 
Top